Sang purchased a cola drink in a plastic bottle with a sealed plastic top from a vending machine located in the hall of his college dormitory room. After drinking ¾ of the cola, Sang took another drink, and felt a sharp object enter his mouth. The object turned out to be a metal tab-top like those found on aluminum cans. Sang’s tongue was slightly cut by the tab-top and he had to consult a doctor. Lab tests conducted on the remaining cola revealed that the cola Sang drank was not poisonous or tainted.
Compare the potential legal liability of the entities involved, and identify the possible legal claims under which Sang could sue.
a. Sue the college, the owner of the vending machine and the manufacturer of the vending machine for ordinary negligence, but not strict product liability as the cola was not defective.
b. Sue the college, the owner of the vending machine, the manufacturer of the vending machine, and the cola manufacturer for strict product liability, including negligence.
c. Sue the college, the owner of the vending machine, and the cola manufacturer for strict product liability, including negligence and breach of implied warranty of merchantability.
d. Sue no one; he has no claim against any one because the cola was not poisonous or tainted.